From: Richard B. <ma...@ri...> - 2001-03-11 13:47:48
|
> if you want, I've got your old code and can have a go at making the conversion. Feel free, I was just wondering what's the best setup, on one hand it's nice and simple to be able to call myLayer.grow() or myLayer.shrink() On the other hand the animation extension approach is more solid. Is there an easy way to link the two? something like: DynLayer.prototype.setGrow= function(dlyr,stepn,stepsize,speed) { this.grow = new Animation.Grow(dlyr,stepn,stepsize,speed); } DynLayer.prototype.grow= function() { if(this.grow)this.grow.playAnimation(false); } DynLayer.prototype.shrink= function() { if(this.grow)this.grow.playAnimation(true); } Could it be so simple, or am I missing something? > Also what do you think of the java like class setup. I found it "interesting", but I'm not a Java user, so I'm not sure how that works, and as I have enough to do as it is, I leave the structural changes to those who know what they are talking about ;O) BTW I found a PDF on cross-browser JAVA, with something on the Mac, and having to call something twice for it to work, do you want me to look for it again? Cheers, Richard Bennett ma...@ri... www.richardinfo.com (Everything running on, and ported to the 19/12/2000 snapshot of DynAPI2) Find the DynAPI faq here: http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=656&group_id=5757 Browse the mailinglist here: http://www.mail-archive.com/index.php3?hunt=dynapi > when did we become DynMacromedia ?? > > just kidding : ) > > if you want, I've got your old code and can have a go at making the conversion. > > Also what do you think of the java like class setup. > > I was thinking of changing my code so that all object constructors are attached > to a single point and then we can simply delete them all from there in some sort > of memory leak "solution". > eg: code.ext.Animation.Glow > code.gui.DynLayer, gui.DynDocument > code.gui.ScrollBar > > similar to that used for accessing java classes in Netscape LiveConnect. > |